Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[VislarRn]

There is this idea of a thing called a philosophical zombie. It's basicaly just a robot that made to resemble a human in every way but lacks a soul or anything like that. But if it is programmed to think its alive and truly sentient.....is it truly alive and sentient?

If you took an insect and expanded its consciousness using cyberpunk wizardry to human or even further levels....is the resulting consciousness truly sentient?

Well, if you like to expand consciousness, you'll have to define fundamental unit that is able to carry conscious perception.
Fundamentals of consciousness are basically triadic processes.

1. Subject (idea)
2. Sign - (form taken from sensory experience)
3. Object (reference)

* Subject + Sign = Experience [used in making and retrieving memories / episodic memory gets taken to pieces and combined]
* Sign + Object = Convention [creates shared semiotic environment for communication, e.g. inner dialogue, allows you to predict future]
* Object + Subject = Perception [experience that is not semiotically mediated / forms raw episodic memory, only happens in present]

As you can see, dwarf fortress doesn't simulate any of this even remotely.
Another problem, is that semiotically mediated processes are potentially infinite. E.g. you can multiply all semiotic units by different semiotic units in potentially infinite manner, endlessly creating new kind of symbols and recombining them to new ones. This system is insanely powerful compared to computer algorithms, which generally work in linear manner. Linear processes collapse, when one step / line of code gets disrupted. But brain is like computer that carries an "algorithm" that is able to recombine itself in adaptive manner and saves it's own past recombinations as a part of itself. Imagine trying to create something like this. It's a problem that must be addressed when attempting to create digitally sentient being.

Wait... damn... in context of DF, it would mean that dwarf fortress code would become self aware and start coding itself.
That would eventually lead to passing a technological singularity (version 1.0) and then we would all be... slaves to the AI to Armok.

Yes, now I see it. Future - it is inevitable.

[KittyTac]

Now I'm daydreaming about 1.0.

[wierd]

They do not know that they're in a simulation. But the point is moot, because they're dumb as bricks and are not sentient at all. If Toady hasn't programmed them to be sentient, they aren't. It can't be otherwise. They can't think or feel, their thoughts are only an approximation. I don't really care either way and regularly go on rampages.

They know as much about the simulation that they're in as we know about the simulation that we are in.

We do not know if we are in a simulation. It's best to assume that we aren't unless proven otherwise.

*whistles*
https://www.space.com/32543-universe-a-simulation-asimov-debate.html

[KittyTac]

It's not like I care about this. DF characters aren't even 0.1% sentient. End of story.

[Findulidas]

If you think the sinple pieces of data being destroyed is a problem, then you need to join the jains and sweep the street as you walk along since you might potentially step on something miniscule and kill it.

I also think you should stop eating not only animals but plants as well since all plants have a infinitely more complex nervous system than anything in df.

In essence its not worth bothering over the quite simple points of data in any games we play.

[KittyTac]

And you kill billions upon billions of bacteria as you walk. You bastard.

[Zaphod]

They do not know that they're in a simulation. But the point is moot, because they're dumb as bricks and are not sentient at all. If Toady hasn't programmed them to be sentient, they aren't. It can't be otherwise. They can't think or feel, their thoughts are only an approximation. I don't really care either way and regularly go on rampages.

They know as much about the simulation that they're in as we know about the simulation that we are in.

Exactly

[KittyTac]

They do not know that they're in a simulation. But the point is moot, because they're dumb as bricks and are not sentient at all. If Toady hasn't programmed them to be sentient, they aren't. It can't be otherwise. They can't think or feel, their thoughts are only an approximation. I don't really care either way and regularly go on rampages.

They know as much about the simulation that they're in as we know about the simulation that we are in.

Exactly

Why would I care?

[Zaphod]

They do not know that they're in a simulation. But the point is moot, because they're dumb as bricks and are not sentient at all. If Toady hasn't programmed them to be sentient, they aren't. It can't be otherwise. They can't think or feel, their thoughts are only an approximation. I don't really care either way and regularly go on rampages.

They know as much about the simulation that they're in as we know about the simulation that we are in.

Exactly

Why would I care?

Ethics?

[KittyTac]

They do not know that they're in a simulation. But the point is moot, because they're dumb as bricks and are not sentient at all. If Toady hasn't programmed them to be sentient, they aren't. It can't be otherwise. They can't think or feel, their thoughts are only an approximation. I don't really care either way and regularly go on rampages.

They know as much about the simulation that they're in as we know about the simulation that we are in.

Exactly

Why would I care?

Ethics?

Deleting little bits of data has no ethical repercussions. They have about the intelligence of bacteria. And you step on and kill billions of bacteria with every step.

[PatrikLundell]

You're vastly under estimating the "intelligence" and agency of bacteria when placing them on an equal footing with a crude simulation of some behaviors (this is not intended as criticism of DF). DF is far below the level of virii as well (the real world kind, not the malicious code one).

[KittyTac]

You're vastly under estimating the "intelligence" and agency of bacteria when placing them on an equal footing with a crude simulation of some behaviors (this is not intended as criticism of DF). DF is far below the level of virii as well (the real world kind, not the malicious code one).

Well, that furthers my point. They're LESS intelligent than bacteria. And you kill trillions of bacteria every day.

[PlumpHelmetMan]

Honestly this discussion is absurd. Why are we even still debating this?

[Maximum Spin]

It is not ethical, but not for that reason.

[KittyTac]

It is not ethical, but not for that reason.

What reason, exactly?